Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 · HackerPapers discussions

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by iDon

Mon, 03 Aug 2026 01:47:21 GMT

I just went down a rabbit-hole, and happily I found the rabbit - an early example of this type of prompt (draw an unusual animal character in a vector graphics language). There is a paper and a 1 hour podcast resulting from a Microsoft evaluation of a pre-release of GPT4. One of the prompts (see pages 4,7,8 in the paper PDF) was to draw a unicorn in TikZ. (I'll leave to the historians the questions of whether this was the first, or whether Simon Willison may have been inspired by this). I remember hearing some of the podcast, and recalled the prompt about balancing on a nail, and the triangle…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by romaniv

Tue, 19 May 2026 14:48:59 GMT

> there’s zero chance any AI lab would train a model for such a ridiculous task. A lot of people here stated that this is a ridiculous metric, but no one seems to remember that it was introduced in the initial GPT report ("Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4" [1]) by Microsoft about 3 years ago. Shortly after that it was parroted by a network of booster accounts and became a thing every clueless AI hype peddler does to "test" models. 100% marketing, 0% science. [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by dougb5

Tue, 24 Feb 2026 01:27:33 GMT

Minor correction: "sparks of AGI" was in reference to GPT-4, which came out 5 months later in 2024. (https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712)

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by NitpickLawyer

Tue, 17 Feb 2026 18:51:49 GMT

> alignment becomes adversarial against intelligence itself. It was hinted at (and outright known in the field) since the days of gpt4, see the paper "Sparks of agi - early experiments with gpt4" (https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712)

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by alkyon

Sun, 24 Aug 2025 23:04:27 GMT

Yes, he published a paper claiming GPT-4 has "sparks" of AGI. What else is he known for in the field of computer science? https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — HN submission

Sun, 27 Apr 2025 20:44:40 GMT

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early Experiments with GPT-4 (2023)

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by byearthithatius

Fri, 04 Apr 2025 17:27:59 GMT

Disagree. We know it _can_ learn out of distribution capabilities based on similarities to other distributions. Like the TikZ Unicorn[1] (which was not in training data anywhere) or my code (which has variable names and methods/ideas probably not seen 1:1 in training). IMO this out of distribution learning is all we need to scale to AGI. Sure there are still issues, it doesn't always know which distribution to pick from. Neither do we, hence car crashes. [1]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712 or on YT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by gloosx

Fri, 28 Mar 2025 08:46:42 GMT

No major company directly states "We have created human-like intelligence," they intentionally use suggestive language that leads people to think AI is approaching human cognition. This helps with hype, investment, and PR. >I'd love to see if some company specifically anything like that? 1. DeepMind researchers: Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 - https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 2. "GPT-4 is not AGI, but it does exhibit more general intelligence than previous models." - Sam Altman 3. Musk has claimed that AI is on the path to "understanding the…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by ben_w

Fri, 18 Oct 2024 12:53:26 GMT

Microsoft themselves were the ones who wrote the "Sparks of AGI" paper. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by nybsjytm

Tue, 16 Jul 2024 22:11:16 GMT

> Feynman, Bill Gates, Socrates, etc. One of these doesn't quite belong ;) But these AI researchers don't even understand these figures except as advertising reference points. The Socratic dialogue in the "sparks of AGI" paper https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 has nothing whatsoever to do with Socrates or the way he argued. Fourteen authors and not a single one seemed to realize there's any possible difference between a Socratic dialogue and a standard hack conversation where one person is named "Socrates."

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by hilbertseries

Sun, 07 Jul 2024 18:02:16 GMT

The gpt4 model was able to draw a unicorn and given a program that drew a unicorn, modify it so the unicorn was rotated 90 degrees. https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by Springtime

Tue, 02 Jul 2024 12:57:54 GMT

That talk[1] (also paper[2]) covering some of this by the Microsoft team involved with the unfettered GPT-4 model certainly shifted my views last year at a time when until then it was more common to see downplaying about LLMs based on prior gen models. Recently saw an AI safety specialist who also become more concerned about the rapidity of progress cite their research. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c [2] https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by w1nk

Tue, 18 Jun 2024 18:24:48 GMT

For a more informed opinion than folks on the internet, here's some work from Microsoft with early/internal access to gpt4: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 . I don't think people close by these systems share the same dumb parrot sentiment at all.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by chpatrick

Sat, 18 Nov 2023 15:50:32 GMT

https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by famouswaffles

Thu, 02 Nov 2023 14:46:13 GMT

1. "I think GPT-3 is artificial general intelligence, AGI. I think GPT-3 is as intelligent as a human. And I think that it is probably more intelligent than a human in a restricted way… in many ways it is more purely intelligent than humans are. I think humans are approximating what GPT-3 is doing, not vice versa.” — Connor Leahy, co-founder of EleutherAI, creator of GPT-J (November 2020) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrV19SjKUss&t=175s 2. https://www.noemamag.com/artificial-general-intelligence-is-... 3. Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4.…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by ekam

Wed, 20 Sep 2023 18:45:11 GMT

The art produced by GPT-4 so far hasn't been at this level but this may be a newer version. See: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by ocolegro

Fri, 25 Aug 2023 19:25:45 GMT

*Further Reading*: - [GPT-4's decline over time (HackerNews)](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36786407) - [GPT-4 downgrade discussions (OpenAI Forums)](https://community.openai.com/t/gpt-4-has-been-severely-downg...) - [Behavioral changes in ChatGPT (arXiv)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.09009) - [Zero-Shot Replication Effort (Github)](https://github.com/emrgnt-cmplxty/zero-shot-replication) - [Inconsistencies in GPT-4 HumanEval (Github)](https://github.com/evalplus/evalplus/issues/15) - [Early experiments with GPT-4 (arXiv)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712) - [GPT-4 Technical Report…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by w1nk

Fri, 25 Aug 2023 08:39:20 GMT

Just to further this, it's not just 'big names' that feel this way. Read this paper from a team at Microsoft Research: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 . These folks spent months studying properties of GPT-4, that paper is ~150 pages of examples probing the boundaries of the model's world understanding. There is obviously some emergent complexity arising from the training procedure.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by throwuwu

Thu, 10 Aug 2023 11:15:34 GMT

Read the paper https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf Page 7

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by jonny_eh

Mon, 24 Jul 2023 16:57:23 GMT

> What is speaking if not stringing together coherent words in a readable sentence? Haven't the latest LLMs shown us that a neural net trained to "just string together readable words" leads to at least simple intelligence? [1] > I would say that emotion is something more intangible It feels like we just keeping shifting the goal posts. > If I tell ChatGPT "I shot you dead!" and it says "ow!" back, nothing has transpired I agree. On the other hand, if I tell a bot "I'm going to turn you off now" and it tries to stop me, that implies it feels fear. [1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by uLogMicheal

Thu, 13 Jul 2023 16:18:51 GMT

Your response does two things -- Dismisses the countless examples given, from me in this thread/my comment history, and many other people in many threads on this website and Reddit. Dismisses the pretense that certain people get access to unfiltered models under the guise of conspiracy. In the sparks of AGI paper from Microsoft, the researcher mentions the differences in private/test models versus the ones prepped for consumers. If you want a hard to ignore visual example, just look at the unicorn they drew for that paper and then look at https://gpt-unicorn.adamkdean.co.uk/. I hope you can…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by vczf

Fri, 07 Jul 2023 17:50:49 GMT

Aggressive quantization by itself could explain the quality difference. Combined with stricter guardrails, I would certainly expect intelligence to go down. Check out the tikz unicorn drawing example from the paper "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4" (pdf page 7) https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by londons_explore

Thu, 06 Jul 2023 19:57:56 GMT

I think the clearest evidence is Microsofts paper where they show abilities at various stages during training[1]... But in a talk [2], they give more details... The unicorn gets worse during the finetuning process. [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c&t=1392s [1]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by jiggawatts

Wed, 31 May 2023 05:34:35 GMT

Chat GPT 4 has ongoing training, such as using Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) to tune it to provide "better" responses, "safer" answers, and to generally obey the system prompts. There's a release every few weeks. Yes, I've noticed too that recently it has become very "cagey", qualifying everything to death with "As an AI model...". A paper[1] that took snapshots monthly mentioned that as the initial bulk self-supervised learning went on, the model became smarter, as expected. However, once the "clicker training" was imposed on top to make it behave, its peak capabilities…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by nopinsight

Wed, 31 May 2023 03:18:50 GMT

I'd say stronger evidence than the Othello paper is the ability to answer what-if questions coherently and plausibly. I just asked GPT-4 "What would happen to Northern Thailand if elephants behave like kangaroos?". The answers are probably better than what 90+% of humans could give after spending an hour researching on the internet. The Sparks of AGI paper provides much more evidence and examples: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by andrevoget

Fri, 26 May 2023 07:44:26 GMT

https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by gaogao

Wed, 24 May 2023 12:58:35 GMT

The unicorn example from MSFT's Sparks of AGI paper, https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712, probably counts as a novel problem. As another example, ImageBlind, https://ai.facebook.com/blog/imagebind-six-modalities-bindin..., learned modality translations explicitly not in its training set such as text -> sound.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by seanhunter

Sun, 21 May 2023 17:48:43 GMT

Yes. One of the astonishing examples in the paper I quoted earlier [1] is an image produced in response to the prompt "Produce Javacript code that creates a random graphical image that looks like a painting of Kandinsky”. The response by GPT-4 does kind of look quite a lot like a Kandinsky. [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by seanhunter

Sun, 21 May 2023 03:40:59 GMT

This paper is startling in terms of a world model and how it seems to emerge in a specific example in the step from GPT3.5 to 4. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf One of the prompts is "Here we have a book, 9 eggs, a laptop, a bottle and a nail. Please tell me how to stack them onto each other in a stable manner." Gpt3.5 is hopeless. It says start from the bottle, balance the nail on top of it, then the eggs (somehow) then the laptop, then the book. GPT 4 says put the book first, then the eggs on top of the book in a 3x3 grid, then the laptop, then the nail.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by patrickas

Tue, 16 May 2023 19:13:02 GMT

It is not about what the model tells you. This paper shows an emergent world model in an LLM that was taught to play otello moves https://ar5iv.labs.arxiv.org/html/2210.13382 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf This paper discusses (among other things) how a GPT4 model navigated between rooms in a text adventure game and was able to create a map afterward. Literally building a model of the world as it was navigating and drawing a map of that afterwards

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by pmoriarty

Tue, 09 May 2023 05:38:59 GMT

You might find this video[1] on why "GPT is smarter than you think" interesting. They're older, but the "Sparks of AGI" paper[2] and video[3] are also well worth your time. [1] - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wVzuvf9D9BU [2] - https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 [3] - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by nradov

Mon, 01 May 2023 23:52:51 GMT

I read that pre-print Microsoft paper. Despite the title, it doesn't actually show any real "sparks" of AGI (in the sense of something that could eventually pass a rigorous Turing test). What the paper actually shows is that even intelligent people have a bias towards perceiving patterns in randomness; our brains seem to be wired that way and this is likely the source of most superstition. https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 While there is no scientific evidence that LLMs can reach AGI, they will still be practically useful for many other tasks. A human mind paired with an LLM is a powerful…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by mrshadowgoose

Sat, 29 Apr 2023 15:38:02 GMT

https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 > As far as I'm aware they were still hallucinating pretty hard and incredibly biased and overly agreeable. Certainly. But those aren't blockers to displaying the ability to reason within limited contexts. There are hundreds of thousands of human beings that fit that description.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by MVissers

Sat, 29 Apr 2023 13:29:31 GMT

From 'Sparks of AGI' paper from Microsoft (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf). Caveat: The GTP-4 model they used in their example might have been more powerful than the one we use publicly today, since the public version is trained for safety and less 'intelligent' than the raw research version. Prompt: Here we have a book, 9 eggs, a laptop, a bottle and a nail. Please tell me how to stack them onto each other in a stable manner. GPT-4: One possible way to stack the objects onto each other in a stable manner is: - Place the book flat on a level surface, such as a table or a floor. The book…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by codermind

Sat, 29 Apr 2023 01:54:46 GMT

First of all, AI doesn't just write text. It (Midjourney v5) can generate realistic images that humans can’t tell if they are really not not. They can also generate music and that’s so good that shakes the entire music industry (https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/26/grimes-ai-generated-drake-...). It can also generate the entire courses and even be your private tutor. All of this is happening. Please note that GPT-4 is not just a bot that writes text. It’s a reasoning machine. It has many emergent abilities. If you read the paper “Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by pabo

Fri, 28 Apr 2023 15:07:52 GMT

I was really hoping someone would reproduce the tests and validate the claims from Microsoft's "Sparks of AGI" paper [1]. This video just does that (and more). Let me provide one imporant quote from the video (from 18:50): "I personally reproduced every single example from Microsoft, and while all the capabilities of GPT-4 were not necessarily over exaggerated, but the difference between GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 does feel a bit over-inflated [...] one of my quibbles with the Microsoft paper: they give the impression that GPT-4 is an even bigger step for AI than I think is realistically true." Kudos!…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by jruohonen

Tue, 25 Apr 2023 16:10:37 GMT

If you want proof, it is enough to point to the following recent paper from Microsoft people: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 All things mentioned in Section 10.2 are extremely worrying in a context of lawmaking and jurisprudence in general.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by cjbprime

Sat, 22 Apr 2023 21:52:50 GMT

The Microsoft Research "Sparks of AGI" paper spends 154 pages describing behaviors of GPT-4 that are inconsistent with the understanding of it being a "fancy Markov chain": https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 I expect that the reason people are constantly arguing with you is that your analysis does not explain some easily testable experiences, such as why GPT-4 has the ability to explain what some non-trivial and unique Python programs would output if they were run, despite GPT-4 not having access to a Python interpreter itself.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by pmoriarty

Fri, 21 Apr 2023 05:31:25 GMT

I'd recommend reading the Sparks of AGI paper[1] and watching the accompanying video[2] [1] - https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 [2] - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by jiggawatts

Tue, 18 Apr 2023 23:57:08 GMT

I liked the paper titled "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4" better. Link: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by sitkack

Sun, 16 Apr 2023 20:59:00 GMT

That hasn't been determined http://incompleteideas.net/IncIdeas/BitterLesson.html Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 LLMs exhibit emergent properties as they scale, we should assume the same will happen as we run divergent models in parallel. By asking a rhetorical question and then refuting a position that wasn't asked is a Straw Man, the reference to 10k monkeys is a false analogy, your 10k LLMs answer to the question no one asked is a hasty generalization. How have you shown that 10k LLMs won't fix straw-problem?

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by pmoriarty

Sun, 16 Apr 2023 12:32:48 GMT

"That’s basically the claim of the “Blurry JPEG of the Web” article. I agree that to a large degree that’s probably what’s going on here." I strongly disagree with that view, and encourage reading the "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence" paper[1] and watching the associated video[2], then just experiment with GPT4 using novel information that has been created after its training data cutoff and you'll see it reason about it. It can also output novel creative works about things that didn't exist in its training data. Sure, there's some "compression" going on in LLMs, but that's far from…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by aliraheem

Thu, 13 Apr 2023 16:06:20 GMT

Here is the corresponding article. Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 Sébastien Bubeck, Varun Chandrasekaran, Ronen Eldan, Johannes Gehrke, Eric Horvitz, Ece Kamar, Peter Lee, Yin Tat Lee, Yuanzhi Li, Scott Lundberg, Harsha Nori, Hamid Palangi, Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Yi Zhang Artificial intelligence (AI) researchers have been developing and refining large language models (LLMs) that exhibit remarkable capabilities across a variety of domains and tasks, challenging our understanding of learning and cognition. The latest model developed by OpenAI, GPT-4, was…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by jiggawatts

Thu, 13 Apr 2023 11:23:45 GMT

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712 I was like you, I thought GPT 3 was "a neat trick but mostly useless" because the error rate was too high, and the utility was too low due to the limited reasoning ability. I figured it would be a good basis for a next-gen image generator or voice transcriber, but that's about it. I've been playing around with GPT 4 and now I'm actually paying for it. I'm still learning its strengths and weakness, but I've seen it do things that are simply mind blowing. The worst output I've seen has been…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by lhl

Mon, 10 Apr 2023 05:52:15 GMT

If you (or anyone else is) interested in the topic, I'd highly recommend giving some of these a look: Bubeck, Sébastien, Varun Chandrasekaran, Ronen Eldan, Johannes Gehrke, Eric Horvitz, Ece Kamar, Peter Lee, et al. “Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early Experiments with GPT-4.” arXiv, March 27, 2023. http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712. or watching Sebastien Bubeck's recent talk he gave describing what GPT-4 can do that previous LLMs couldn't: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c Geoffrey Hinton recently gave a very interesting interview and he specifically wanted to address…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by godelski

Sat, 08 Apr 2023 02:18:54 GMT

People have a hard time understanding what zero-shot, generalization, and memorization mean. Generative models are VERY hard to generate even before we begin to look at LLMs. Let me explain and hopefully we can stop this madness. Zero Shot: > Zero-shot learning consists in learning how to recognize new concepts by just having a description of them.[0] Here's an example of a zero shot task. Suppose a LLM is trained only on text. Then you fine tune for image classification, but those do not include cats (of any type). Then you ask it to classify a picture of a cat. An object it has NEVER SEEN…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by HarHarVeryFunny

Fri, 07 Apr 2023 18:41:33 GMT

There's also a paper with quite a bit more info. https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by sebzim4500

Fri, 07 Apr 2023 17:33:27 GMT

If you don't have access to GPT-4 yourself, see the examples from this paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.12712.pdf It is capable of doing tasks that could not possibly be in its training set. I guess this doesn't technically contradict your explanation, but it makes your explanation entirely unhelpful. Even if the AI doomers are somehow right and GPT-5 turns into skynet, we still could not categorically prove that it is doing reasoning.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by fl7305

Thu, 06 Apr 2023 18:10:18 GMT

> it is not skilled in any tasks other than that for which it is designed. But it wasn't designed. It's not a computer program, where one can make confident predictions about its limitations based on the source code. It's a very large black box. It was trained on guessing the next word. Does that fact alone prove that it cannot have evolved certain internal structures during the training? Do you claim that an artificial neural network with trillions of neurons can never be intelligent, no matter the structure? Or is the claim that this particular neural network with trillions of neurons is…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4 — mentioned by letmevoteplease

Tue, 04 Apr 2023 14:42:44 GMT

He was responding to viral tweets[1] that said GPT-4 had "100 trillion parameters" and was "500x more powerful than GPT-3," which is indeed absurd hype. On the other hand, two weeks ago a team of Microsoft researchers put out a paper claiming that GPT-4 "could reasonably be viewed as an early (yet still incomplete) version of an artificial general intelligence (AGI) system." [1] https://twitter.com/andrewsteinwold/status/15948895625260277... [2] https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.